Has Steven Moffat made Doctor Who too complex for viewers?

Mat Smith gets ready to leave the show in the Doctor Who Christmas special (Picture: BBC/Adrian Rogers)

Warning – this may contain mild spoilers about the Doctor Who Christmas special 2013. Steven Moffat has left his mark on Doctor Who, bringing us memorable villains like the Weeping Angels, detailed characters including River Song and, along with Matt Smith, he’s created a fantastic 11th Doctor. But has he made the show too complex for viewers?

Oh yes, he has

The War Doctor – still a Doctor but not a numbered Doctor. Got that? (Picture: BBC)

One of Moffat’s trademarks is fiendish plays on the non-linearity of time. Events intersect and fold over on each other (The Big Bang, among others). Time moves at different speeds in different streams (The Girl Who Waited).

Disrupting a fixed point causes all of time to occur concurrently (The Wedding of River Song). The Doctor and River experience events in opposite directions – the first time he meets her is at her death (SIlence in the Library/Forest of the Dead). It can be tough to follow.

Then there’s the numbering of the Doctors. Matt Smith is known as the Eleventh Doctor. And yet now we have John Hurt’s War Doctor, and Moffat tells us a further regeneration was used up during the David Tennant era. The 11th Doctor is actually his 13th – and final – incarnation. So how does Peter Capaldi fit into the picture?

And then there are the intricate long-term arcs. Moffat seeds plot elements in multiple episodes over the course of a series, sometimes longer. Watch the BBC America trailer for the Christmas special and you will see (at 37 seconds) a hotel door …

Seem familiar? Here’s the same door from the episode The God Complex.

If it is the same, how many viewers will make the link to a 27-month-old episode? Such detailed, serialised plotting can put off casual viewers.

Is this too complex? Maybe.

Oh no, he hasn’t

Clara – the impossible girl – has featured throughout the Doctor’s timeline saving his life (Picture: BBC/Adrian Rogers)

Or maybe not.

In fairness to Moffat, he doesn’t take his audience’s knowledge for granted. Expositional dialogue or a flashback are commonly used to join the dots. And although it’s a reward for eagle-eyed fans, it often isn’t necessary to make the connection, with the resultant revelation akin to the conclusion of a conjuring trick.

Moffat wields these storytelling devices with a flourish. Indeed, he delights in hiding big plot twists in plain sight – such as Oswin Oswald’s souffle recipe revealing her as a Dalek in Asylum of the Daleks. (‘Eggs-stir-minate’.)

And he consciously avoids technobabble. Instead we have throwaway terminology (‘wibbley wobbley timey-wimey’) or a wave of the sonic. In Moffat’s world, it’s not important how the Doctor gets out of trouble – merely that he does. This moves stories along by taking complexity out of dialogue.

So, what are we to conclude? Are stories in the Moffat era intricately constructed? Yes. Complex? Frequently. But too complex?

And the answer is …

It depends. (You knew I was going to say that, right?)

If you long for the simplicity of classic adventures such as An Unearthly Child then yes, Doctor Who is immensely complex. If you’re looking for stories which force you to watch carefully and think about what you’re seeing then no, it’s merely an exciting, adrenalin-fuelled ride.

But what do you think?

Metro Blogs is a place for opinions. These opinions belong to the author and are not necessarily shared by Metro.